03/05/91 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Board). The ~un{:il opposes this changed trail routing because it would eliminate any visual or physical ace. e~lI to the river. This is contrary to the intent of the Mississippi River Critical Area designation a.ad suiSsequent planning guidelines calling for a river-oriented trail. Furthermore, tlie developer initially submitted this plat in August, 1990, and proposed a river-oriented trail. (Augu~t ~;1, 1990 letter from Sylvia FroIik to Rand Klugel). Council staff made no comment about the trail ~t thht time because it was consistent with the Critical Area planning guidelines. The city of RaraseY, lsho~ld require the developer to route the trail along the river-oriented alignment indicated in th~ August 1, 1990 letter as a condition of approving the plat for the Faye addition. TransportatiOn! Gateway NortkiAi~ort lies directly north of the proposed subdivision. Areas around Gateway North Airport are afl ~e~cted by MnDOT land use safety zoning ordinance requirements. Implementation of this safety zone~imay require local rezoning of incompatible land uses, especially residential land uses that cannot b~ pe.t~nitted in any part of the airport safety zone A as well as density and use restrictions in s~fety Zone B. The eastern portion of this subdivision is within the safety zone and its developmCn~ should be coordinated with the city's efforts to make the Gateway Airport a municipally owned ~acility. Sewei's As stated earlier, thc western portion of the proposed development is presently located outside the city's MUSA ~:x~ ans!on approved by the Council on July 7, 1989. Sewer service cannot be extended until another MU'SA expansion is approved by the Council. The western portion of the project is located in thc ~cma~ing portion of the MUSA expansion request which the Council indicated it would approve iias P, art of a plan amendmcnt incorporating three city resolutions regarding rural residential development, off-site sewer systems and connection to the municipal sewer system. The MUSA expanSign r~quest is pending before thc Council to determine its completeness. The city is reminded that ii: cannot approve service to the western area until a comprehensive plan amendment ~s approved by ~hc (?,ounell. There is suffi¢iSnt Oapacity in the metropolitan sewer system to serve this proposed development depending on tl~e staging of this and other development in the city. This area is served by the Anoka Wastewater Treatment Plant which has limited capacity. The plant is scheduled to be phased out in 1992 and replOe-er d b~ a connection under the river to the CAB interceptor in Champlin. However, the phaseout cannot., occur until the new Minneapolis East Interceptor which carries the flow from the CAB to the Metro plant is also completed. The city is under a 500 REC (Residential Equivalent Connection) l!n/it utitil the Anoka wastewater treatment plant is phased out, which may affect the staging of this d~vel~pment. Recommendations ~'hat the city should require a map showing the location of trees and other vegetation Withia~ 200 feet of the high water mark of the river and it should require a plan showin. 'g how these trees and other vegetation will be protected. That the city should require the developer to route the proposed trail along the river- ~riented alignment indicated in the August 1, 1990 letter as a condition of approving the plat for the Faye Addition.